KUMAR TRADING COMPANY,RAMPUR, UTTAR PRADESH vs. ITO-1(3), RAMPUR-2, RAMPUR, UTTAR PRADESH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 775/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 July 2026AY 2018-193 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) correctly set aside the assessment order and remitted it back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination, considering the ex-parte nature of the assessment and the interest of natural justice. The Tribunal found no illegality in this decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Kumar Trading Company, failed to file a return of income for AY 2018-19. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex-parte under Section 147 read with Section 144, making additions based on best judgment. The assessee objected to these additions during appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte assessment completed under Section 144 can be set aside and remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination in the interest of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

Hearing: 01.07.2026Pronounced: 08.07.2026

P a g e | 1 ITA No.775/Del/2026 Kumar Trading Company (AY: 2018-19) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.775/Del/2026 (Assessment Year: 2018-19)

Kumar Trading Company Vs. ITO-1(3) C/o Mr. Sovendra Kumar, Rampur-2, Income Tax Village Patia, Tehsil, Office, 6 Kothi Khasbhag, Milak, District Rampur Rampur, Uttar Pradesh Uttar Pradesh – 244901 244901 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAIFK8842J Appellant .. Respondent

Appellant by : Sh. Amarbir Singh Walia, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Balkrishan Gopal, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 01.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 08.07.2026

O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 13.11.2025 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1082598927(1) arising

P a g e | 2 ITA No.775/Del/2026 Kumar Trading Company (AY: 2018-19) out of the assessment order dated 21.03.2023 u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B

of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by

NFAC, for AY: 2018-19.

2.

On hearing both sides we find that the issue involved is the additions

made by the Assessing Officer on account of failure of assesse firm to file

return of income and the addition made @ 10% of the turnover which has

been set aside by ld. CIT(A) by following relevant findings:

“5.1 I have carefully considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts, the submissions made by the appellant, the assessment order, and all other material available on record. It is evident from the record that the assessment for AY 2018-19 has been completed ex-parte u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s. 144B on best judgment basis. The appellant has not responded to any of the statutory notices issued during assessment except for filing a Nil return in response to notice u/s 148 of the IT Act and this resulted in the addition: of Rs. 64,08,850/- as business income of the assessee. Now, during the course of appeal proceedings, the assessee is objecting to the addition of 10% of total credits in bank account as business income of the assessee. 5.2 Given the circumstances and in the interest of natural justice, the appellant deserves an opportunity to present all relevant evidence and explanations before the Assessing Officer. Especially considering that the new proviso to section 251(1)(a) inserted by Finance Bill, 2024, w.e.f. 01.10.2024) specifically empowers the Commissioner (Appeals) to set aside a section 144 assessment and remit it back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. Such a course of action is warranted in the facts of this case to ensure a proper and just determination of taxable income on merits after full consideration of all relevant material.”

3.

At the time of hearing it was pointed out that in regard to AY: 2020-

21 also in consequence to reopening assesse has furnished copy of

dissolution deed and it was submitted that the business was taken over by

one of the partner as proprietorship concern who has been filing return

independently and the turnover reported in the bank accounts have been

P a g e | 3 ITA No.775/Del/2026 Kumar Trading Company (AY: 2018-19) subject to the return filed by the proprietor. Though ld. Counsel has tried to defend the issue on merits. We find that ld. CIT(A) was correct in restoring the issue to assessing officer as the assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act. The submissions which ld. Counsel has relied including those made for AY; 2020-21 which have been accepted by the Assessing Officer to drop the proceedings can very well be taken into account by ld. Assessing Officer and the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) suffers from no illegality which requires our interference. Accordingly, the appeal of assesse is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08.07.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awasthi) (Anubhav Sharma) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated 08.07.2026 Rohit, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →